/sci/ - Science & Math

Hey /sci/, just a quick question.

Does anybody have any pointers for me? I want to start writing a paper on negative numbers, specifically their ontological status. I'm just wondering if anyone has researched this and could give me a point in the right direction on any authors that may have touched this.

I've already looked for some authors, but I would like to ask some of you guys and see who you recommend.

Sup /sci/fags
I've applied to do an apprenticeship course for nuclear engineering. Did I make a good choice? What sort of work should I expect to be doing on the course?

>>2032647
Also, generally, the more 'complicated' the device, the less resistant it is to G-Forces. Though they can usually take it better than a human can.

>>2032684
I am skeptical, but I shall google this.

>>2032751
If by 'nuclear fear' you mean 'nuclear fallout which would irradiate the entire hemisphere for a single launch' then yes, 'nuclear fear' killed Project Orion, which was originally a project for a nuclear powered aircraft.

>>2032788
[citation needed] What would power your vehicle exactly?

>>2032875
Orion didn't HAVE an engine, the idea behind project Orion was to DROP NUCLEAR BOMBS and then RIDE THE BLAST WAVE INTO SPACE.

You, quite literally, surf on a wave of nuclear fire to the fucking moon. Awesome.

I'm seeing a great deal of confusion in this thread, so let me clear a few things up.
There's basically two ways of using Nuclear power to run a rocket.

1. Use directional heat from the blast to power the rocket.
2. Use a nuclear reactor to power a turbine to lift the rocket.

#1 is awesome because it's relatively lightweight, easy to control, and works in space.
#1 sucks because it would spew radioactivity behind the rocket in the blast area and in the atmosphere, there are few protections against criticality, and the nuclear payload would have to be detached (dropping a radioactive 'dirty-bomb' in an unplanned location) to land.

#2 is awesome because it doesn't spew radiation everywhere
#2 sucks because you would need a COMPLETE FUCKING POWER PLANT on board to function (If I recall correctly, plans for the pre-Orion nuclear plane during the Cold War suggested such a craft would weigh over a million pounds) Also, turbines don't work in space and become less effective as altitude increases, given the mass of the object and the capability of modern turbines, it is technically impossible to launch a rocket into space using the #2 method and practically impossible to use the turbine once outer atmosphere has been gained.

So really the ONLY option that works is the one where you spew radiation everywhere. Which nobody likes because everyone would die. Also cocks.

p=np

proove me wrong